NASA Says Satellite Debris Fell in Pacific 

On September 25^th, 2011, a 13,000-pound satellite, which stopped collecting data six years ago, fell from space and landed somewhere in the Pacific. While its trajectory was tracked, and the point at which it started disintegrating was approximated, NASA didn’t know where the debris ended up. According to the article, there are currently 20,000 pieces of orbiting debris larger than a snowball that is being tracked by the U.S., that there are at least 750 satellites in space, and that more countries seek to launch satellites. The real-life TOK issue is whether it is responsible to launch more satellites.

An AoK involved is ethics. This is because every country should have a right to launch its own satellites. If the U.S. has around 400 satellites in space (which it does), then isn’t it only logical that other countries can have just as many? Why should some countries be excluded from their claims to the outer space? Also, launching satellites can provide us the means to observe outer space by collecting data, taking pictures, and such. On the other hand, with every satellite launched into space, not only does the chance of collision increase, but also the space debris left by humans. And since the number of satellites will be limited sooner or later (there is only so much space for the orbiting to be affective), then which nation/corporation gets how many satellites? The problem of space hasn’t been particularly alarming because it’s so distant and it seems unlimited, but this problem needs to be addressed more before space debris is out of control (there is currently no way to collect space debris, and space debris whiz at insanely fast speeds up to 17,500 mph).

Using the AoK of history to analyze, there has been no injury caused by space debris since the inception of the Space Age. However, the debris that currently circulates earth is pretty much all human-caused and so is only at a stage of building up. It is only a matter of time then, that space debris falling onto earth will hurt someone. At a speed like 17,500 mph, even a tiny speck of debris can destroy a satellite. Actually, this had happened before. In 2009, a drifting Russian satellite collided into a U.S. commercial satellite and caused 2,000 additional space debris. In 2007, China, during an anti-satellite test, used a missile to destroy an old satellite, adding 3,000 additional space debris.

Personally, I think that it is irresponsible to launch more satellites. We were fine before there were satellites, and we don’t immediately need more satellites (or perhaps it’s only fair to say that the society I live in doesn’t need more), so it seems that it’s out of self-interest that more satellites are being launched. The International Space Station is constantly dodging space debris, showing how dangerous it is already. Also, we do not know the long term consequences of our actions, so we should be more careful when launching things into outer space.

Recently, I read a relevant article that talked about how space debris is past the threshold. I’m not sure how credible the claim is, since who’s to say what the threshold for space debris is? However, that the topic has been brought up shows that it is a topic of concern. Other relevant topics would include our natural resources that are currently being depleted. Deforestation, ocean acidification (CO2 footprint), depleting food, water, and energy supplies, etc are all relevant because there is always the question of where the line between preservation and utilization of resources is.